Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

While I may live oveseas, what happens in the US directly impacts me. I am a voting, tax paying US citizen (in fact, I will be sending off my 2006 taxes on Friday). Gay male. Born and raised in the deep (religious) south. And up until recently (a year ago), I was on a US contract (i.e., my employment and benefits were subject to US laws). Hopefully I now tick all the boxes!

I can assure you that my "very principled" stance was not taken from across any Ocean.

Cliff

I stand corrected. Your profile lists your location as the U.K. I simply assumed you were a U.K. citizen. My bad.

Okay, really. You don't need to lecture me. That is pretty much construed as talking down to someone, in case you weren't aware (see how that sentence made you feel like I think you're stupid or something? See how THAT sentence just made you feel like I think I know more than you? Yeah, it works like that.)

Although it may perhaps disappoint you, what you said didn't make me feel stupid. And I wasn't lecturing you. All I did was point out that your argument was ad hominem and not on the merits. That is all.

Quote

You've also, once again, ignored something that questions your intentions in this thread.

I am not sure what the "something" is that you refer to. To the extent it is relevant to this discussion, I, for one, do not question anyone's "intentions." I am not a mind reader, so it is impossible to know what a person subjectively "intends." I therefore stick to what the person expresses in writing and address that.

Quote

First of all, what I said before had nothing to do with the novel-length, babble-style paragraphs you had posted before[.]

See my prior discussion about arguments ad hominem.

Quote

- it has pretty much everything to do with the fact that you've had people post in this thread that are, (in your opinion), in the position to have an opinion on this bill, that disagree with you. Yet, instead of commenting on what they've said, you skip over them, or post something in response to them that are completely irrelevant to the main point of their post.

If you could point out an actual, concrete example of this, it would be helpful. It is difficult to address your criticism without knowing exactly at what it is directed. My recollection is that I have responded to those who disagree with my position, and that I have done so frequently and at length. That I disagree with them and remain unpersuaded by their positions does not mean that I am ignoring or "skipping over" them.

Quote

So what's your opinion on people that are gay, US-citizens and STILL support the all-inclusive, ENDA, Bobino? Are they misguided, ignorant, all out stupid? Why in the world would they disagree with your incredibly self-impressed point of view? Are they self-hating gays? Do they not understand the real issue? Really, Bobino, let us know - me most of all. Why would I be willing to give up the partial rights that I'd be receiving from the non-inclusive version of ENDA just to support the original version? Why would anyone be willing to sacrifice the partial immunity they'd have?

My opinion of the people to whom you refer is that they are people who take a different view than I do. They look at the situation and draw a conclusion that differs from mine. They are fully entitled to do so. And I am fully entitled to disagree. Perhaps it's because I'm a lawyer, but I'm used to reasonable people taking different views, even when they are looking at the same evidence and the same legal rules. Therefore, I reject outright your suggestion that people who may disagree with me are "misguided, ignorant, all out stupid . . . [or] self hating gays." As to why you might be willing to give up "partial rights" or do anything else, only you can explain yourself. As I said earlier, I am not a mind reader. Your subjective motivations and intentions are really not mine to guess at.

Quote

If the situation were reversed, I absolutely one hundred percent would never support a bill that had been put together to protect the entire community and then afterwards kicked the cisgender gays out. I'd tell my trans brothers and sisters that had an issue with it to fuck off.

I understand that that is your position.

Quote

Bobino, you continuously ignore the struggles that trans people have gone through...

Again, it would be helpful if you could cite a concrete example.

Quote

This bill isn't going to pass - at least until Bush is out of office. And maybe by then there will be people in a position of power that are understanding of the issues surrounding gender identity and expression. So why in the hell are you so willing to take trans people out of a bill that simply represents what we are capable of doing as a community that won't actually have any legal effects yet? Your argument is invalid in this situation. Bush is going to vet the sucker one way or another. You're not gaining anything from this, nobody is - and yet so many people are willing to show how easy it is to split our community and how willing so many people are to disregard protection for trans people.

I disagree about passage of the bill, at least in the House. Whether the president will then sign the act is obviously another question entirely. I take issue with the "all or nothing" position that you seem to take on this. As I said in a previous post in response to another member, even if the legislation isn't ultimately signed into law by Bush, there is nevertheless value in getting one or both houses of Congress on record as stating that sexual orientation is a category deserving of legal protection. As I noted before, Congress will then have admitted the principle that is at the core of our argument. Once they have done so, it becomes far more difficult to justify not including everyone. The Republicans understand this perfectly, which is why they're doing everything to keep this from passing, and why all you're hearing from them is "slippery slope" arguments. On that last point, they've got it exactly right, although in this case I have no problem sliding down the slippery slope, because at the bottom lie employment protections for everyone.

I missed this thread until yesterday afternoon. Started reading it just before leaving work and ended up staying another 45 minutes reading and trying to decide what would be the best bill to support. To me it boils down to the ideal outcome versus the realistic outcome. Ideally I would like to see the bill passed and signed that included everyone, but realistically I know that regardless of who is included, EDNA ain't never gonna become law under this administration. So faced with that fact do you try to craft something that will pass Congress even though it will be vetoed in order to push the issue a little farther. I think you do. Every little bit of progress gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender individuals make separately is in the long run progress for us all.

Woods

Logged

"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it." Nelson Mandela

From today's copy of the Task Force newsletter...a little ray of sunshine.

Michigan: Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed an executive directive on Nov. 21 that bans discrimination in state employment on “gender identity or expression.” The directive protects nearly 50,000 state employees in Michigan’s executive branch, which encompasses 95 percent of all state employees. The directive will protect transgender workers as well as any state employee who faces discrimination because they do not conform to traditional gender norms in their behavior and/or appearance. The Task Force assisted our local partner, Triangle Foundation, in crafting the directive’s language, and applauds Triangle’s tireless efforts since 2002 to transform the proposed language into official policy.

It will be interesting to see how the suit turns out, if taken further.

I haven't seen the complaint or read anything about the theory of the case. If it's another one of these claims that the law infringes on the so-called constitutional rights of religious people to condemn homosexuality and such, it will likely fail once again.